Threats to federal funds at K-12 schools and institutions of higher education because of diversity policies have been squashed in a federal courtroom in Virginia.
The Trump administration and plaintiffs last week were successful in a joint petition to dismiss the case known as American Federation of Teachers et al v. U.S. Department of Education et al. at the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision is a significant blow to the Education Department led by Secretary Linda McMahon carrying out second-term Republican President Donald Trump’s agenda on what is known as DEI – diversity, equity and inclusion.
The Education Department has not responded to any media outlet requesting comment. Trump campaigned against the policies, favoring instead meritocracy.
Democracy Forward President and CEO Skye Perryman, representing plaintiffs, said, “Though today is a victory against the administration’s unlawful crusade against civil rights, equity and inclusion, we know the fight to protect public education is far from over.”
Plaintiffs were the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), AFT-Maryland, the American Sociological Association, and Eugene School District 4J.
On Feb. 14 of last year, a letter colloquially known as the “Dear Colleague Letter” went to many schools and school districts. It said federal funds were at risk if students were taught “critical history, sociology, and other lessons that may reference race, provide support to students in the form of diversity, equity, or inclusion programming, or attempt to foster inclusive school environments for students of all backgrounds, among other efforts,” Democracy Forward said.
Race was not to be considered in college admissions, hiring or scholarships. The Education Department said whites and Asian American students were in turn facing discrimination.
States and school districts were asked to sign a certification.
Judge Stephanie Gallagher, in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, ruled free speech of teachers was impacted and sided with plaintiffs. In her ruling, she wrote “both actions run afoul of important constitutional rights.”
